Top News

A fresh controversy has emerged in the judiciary after Supreme Court judge Justice Sandeep Mehta levelled a series of allegations against Acting Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court Sanjiv Prakash Sharma in three letters addressed to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant.

The letters, dated August 2, August 10 and August 17, allege misuse of administrative powers, bias in case listings, attempts to benefit influential parties and threats of transfers to judges.

Justice Mehta has urged the CJI and the Collegium to transfer Justice Sharma out of Rajasthan and appoint a senior judge from another High Court as the Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court.

Justice Mehta Seeks New Rajasthan HC Chief Justice

Justice Mehta alleged that Justice Sharma was abusing his administrative powers and acting in a biased manner to favour influential parties.

He also alleged that Justice Sharma appeared to be in a hurry to take major decisions before his retirement on September 26.

Against this backdrop, Justice Mehta called for Justice Sharma to be transferred out of Rajasthan and for a senior judge from another High Court to be appointed as the Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court.

Allegations Over Case Listings

Justice Mehta alleged that Justice Sharma had used his administrative powers to remove certain cases from the benches of other judges and relist them before his own bench.

According to Justice Mehta, these changes in case listings benefited influential and wealthy parties. He described the listing of some cases as prima facie raising questions about Justice Sharma's integrity.

Udaipur Land Cases Questioned

Justice Mehta also raised questions over the listing of cases concerning highly valuable land in Udaipur.

He alleged that these matters were assigned to Justice Sharma's bench in Jaipur instead of being heard at the principal bench in Jodhpur.

This, he said, happened despite Justice Sharma himself having stated that cases falling within the jurisdiction of the Jodhpur bench should be heard there.

Mining Businessman's Petition

Justice Mehta also questioned the role of the Rajasthan High Court Registry in connection with a petition filed by a mining businessman.

According to his letter, the petition was filed as a special appeal even though it was not maintainable in its original form. The matter was subsequently listed before Justice Sharma's bench.

At the first hearing, Justice Sharma condoned a 457-day delay and stayed a portion of the single judge's order, Justice Mehta alleged.

Claims Of Threats Of Transfer To Judges

Justice Mehta said several Rajasthan High Court judges had complained to him that Justice Sharma, while claiming to be close to the CJI, used his influence to threaten fellow judges with transfers.

He also alleged that lower court judges were being harassed.

Justice Mehta referred to the case of Nandini Vyas, the wife of Rajasthan High Court judge Justice Uma Shankar Vyas. Nandini Vyas is a district court judge.

According to Justice Mehta, Justice Uma Shankar Vyas sent a message to some of his colleagues alleging that Justice Sharma was taking vindictive action against his wife.

Alleged Bias Against Jodhpur Bench

Justice Mehta also accused Justice Sharma of displaying a bias against the Jodhpur principal bench of the Rajasthan High Court.

He alleged that Justice Sharma had told some people that he wanted to dismantle the entire structure of the Jodhpur bench.

Justice Mehta also cited the controversy surrounding the new Jodhpur Metro District Court building. According to him, the building had been fully completed for nearly a year when Justice Sharma visited it, halted its inauguration and ordered major changes to the infrastructure.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant subsequently inaugurated the building on August 15.

Dispute Over Senior Advocates, Judges' Appointments

Justice Mehta further raised questions over the appointment of senior advocates and judges.

According to his letter, a proposal to appoint approximately 96 individuals as senior advocates was introduced at the High Court's full court meeting on July 31 without prior discussion or established criteria.

The proposal was not passed that day after other judges opposed it, he alleged.

Justice Mehta also alleged that Justice Sharma was particularly active in promoting the appointment of a senior advocate's daughter-in-law as a High Court judge.

Allegations Over Jaipur International Conference

Justice Mehta also accused the state judiciary of negligence in connection with an international conference held in Jaipur from July 31 to August 2.

He said that although the conference was primarily organised by a lawyers' association, extensive government funds were used for the event, with approximately Rs 8 million spent from the public treasury.

According to Justice Mehta, almost all Rajasthan High Court judges were asked to attend the conference. As a result, not a single court at the Jodhpur Principal Bench could function effectively for two days.

He further alleged that around 20-22 district judges were sent to the conference, severely disrupting judicial work in their respective districts.